We have C++14

Post by sillysaurus3 » Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 3:55 PM UTC

jonstewart wrote: post #187

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, RAII is the only way to make an exception-safe class. Good luck doing it. It's not easy. I know; I've tried. There are all kinds of corner cases and special considerations that you have to take into account. People have written huge tomes about that exact topic detailing exactly why it's a hard problem and why you're probably not going to solve it correctly by accident. You're far more likely to introduce a memo…

What were these corner cases and special considerations you ran into? I wouldn't call Herb Sutter's _Exceptional C++_ a huge tome and it seems to be the standard treatment of exception safety.

Post by rootbear » Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 4:11 PM UTC

davvid wrote: post #149

PopsiclePete wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad it's a mirage. No, really. "Modern C++" doesn't exist outside of blog posts, books, and tutorials. Real-world C++ is an array of sometimes mututally-exclusive dialects, patterns, rules, sub-dialects. Reading MFC is nothing like reading Qt which is nothing like WxWidgets which is nothing like Boost which is something (but not quite like) the STL which is way different from Apache C++ libs which is way differen…

Too bad it's a mirage I hate to spoil your worldview, but modern C++ is very alive and well in the scientific computing communities. Disney Animation implemented a new renderer using it, and our next movie is currently being rendered using the new renderer, so I highly doubt it's on its way out in the these areas.

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 4:32 PM UTC

_pmf_ wrote: post #219

jonstewart wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a counterpoint, I write "Modern C++" for my job. I know several others who do, too. I'm overjoyed at how much the C++11 features have improved my code (and I'm still learning how to deploy them effectively), as well as how good the compiler support is. MFC was the vilest, most horrible abuse of C++ from the day it was released. Anything that involves MFC should just be rewritten with C# or turned into a webapp. I…

> MFC was the vilest, most horrible abuse of C++ from the day it was released. MFC's greatest benefit was that it made returning to plain win32 C programming without MFC a pleasurable experience.

Post by pjmlp » Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 4:38 PM UTC

loup-vaillant wrote: post #276

EpicEng wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So "Modern C++" is a mirage, but Rust and Go are the surefire winners? Do you have any substance to add to your post? I don't know, I've been writing C++ for about a decade and the code I write is "modern" as far as I can tell. I just started a new project. It is C++, it is "modern", and Rust and Go simply aren't options. Rust is an infant and not yet ready for prime time, and Go simply wouldn't be considered by mana…

Why do people keep assuming that they need an X programmer, or a Y programmer? Go is a garbage collected imperative and OO language, right? It's not like Java and C++ programmers wouldn't be able to learn the basics in 3 days, and be proficient in a couple weeks. Why does the "pool of talent" even matters ?

Post by zanny » Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 4:42 PM UTC

millstone wrote: post #82

zanny wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just write C style C++? I never understand the arguments to use C anymore - you can write C style C++ and get on with your life, and cherry pick the features you want. In C++ unicode is as simple as: string s = u8"This is always a utf8 string.";

Unicode is much more complex than that. For example, how would you then convert that string to uppercase, or truncate it? For Unicode strings in C++, you can either limp along with the wchar_t support, or leverage something like ICU. Neither is especially easy.